Children's Books discussion

Hi everyone, despite no longer having small children to read to, I love picture books and enjoy reading them for my own pleasure. However I am frequently feeling frustrated at the quality of writing in many of the picture books I read. I don't normally have an issue with a picture book written in prose, it's those that are written in poetry that bug me, mainly because the poetry I'm seeing in picture books is often of a poor standard. The most irritating issue I encounter is ignorance of meter, but I also see poor rhyming skills and other inconsistencies.
Am I the only one who has a problem with this? It's my personal opinion that poetry in children's books should adhere to a high standard, as children are learning the foundations of rhythm and rhyme etc. But I'm starting to wonder if I'm out of sync with the majority of picture book readers. Am I being too fussy, or have expectations dropped since the days of Dr Seuss?

I'm definitely with you on this. One idea that I have seen advanced about this (in How to Write a Children's Picture Book and Get It Published, among other places) is that publishers like to have a single author/illustrator and it seems they are choosing illustrators who can write instead of authors who can illustrate. It may be convenient and economical, but I think it's mostly a disaster artistically.

I do think the expectations have dropped, and I also think "traditional" poetry - rhyme in meter - gets short shrift in English curricula (at all levels). Maybe people think it's "old fashioned" and "dated." Of course, children don't think that way - it's new to them!

Elsewhere here I've sung the praises of Margaret Mahy's rhyming picture books - try Bubble Trouble, if you don't know it!

P.S. - And of course, all this talk about single creators falls apart when you have different people writing and illustrating. Then the bad writers have no excuse whatsoever!

I have noticed this, as well. In my opinion, poor writing abounds and children's writing is no exception. I'm picky about this sort of thing, but when one sees what the reading public is actually reading these years, it's obvious just about anyone can get published these days if they know how to attract attention for certain topics. Sensationalism is currently more important than ability to write well and it's okayed because most cannot write well.

I view books as not just storytelling avenues, but teachers of language. Not all of us do. Thankfully, those of us with higher standards still have many great books from which to choose.

Can you give examples, Janelle, to clarify?

I see badly rhymed and awkwardly metered text that is meant to be read in a fluid rhythm... but that's prose masquerading as poetry.

Do you actually see bad poetry?

Yes, there are a lot of bad picture-books out there. There always have been. There are plenty of good ones, too.

Michael, I've been chalking these poorly written books up to poor editing. Surely, editing is still a profession? I used to edit and I always perceived it as part of my job to help improve writing while preserving the tone and voice of the writer and the integrity of the work. There are many, many good storytellers who are poor writers, but someone should be catching that in the process of publishing. Teamwork is important for well-written books and articles.

Oh, I'm with you against the poor editors! I just finished reading a bio of Margaret Wise Brown and it was interesting to learn about her interactions with editors, as well as with other highly-qualified peers who critiqued her work. Also I learned about how much of her work was left unpublished. We are now seeing that nachlass being published, and I haven't found much of it that would rate with her best work. I have to wonder whether the back-and-forth between MWB and someone like Ursula Nordstrom (her editor at Harper & Bros.) is what produced what we consider classics. As you say, teamwork. Clearly, every time an author (even one with a good track record) puts pen to paper will not result in a masterpiece.

I could rail against the modern educational system - are schools and colleges producing authors and editors (and librarians) with knowledge of the history of not only children's literature, but of poetry and other literary forms as well? Do the authors of children's books have that kind of training and background? MWB was educated (in French) in a Swiss boarding school and then at an American prep school. She then attended a private women's college with a well-known writing program. I was surprised to learn that The Runaway Bunny came from an old French poem, but it made a lot of sense. Before TV there was a lot more reading going on. I see the influence of MWB in a lot of picture books, but I think it's a more superficial imitation. They are seeking what she found, as opposed to seeking what she sought.

P.S. I like this Sendak quote from nearly four decades ago. And there are still more picture books being published now than even then.

"nachlass" - great new word, ty

And the Sendak quote, oh, yeah. I get so frustrated trying to find childhood favorites.

Yes, I've yet to read any nachlass (great word) that was worth publishing.

Personally, I enjoy all the books being published. It's so beautiful to see them, even if I lack interest in reading them. Books are probably my favorite part of capitalism. :)

Thanks everyone, its nice to see I'm not the only one with this issue.

Cheryl, one book that I have recently read is Goodnight, Campsite (which has a separate author and illustrator). The author has had some exposure to meter (as we all do without even realising it), and uses meter throughout the book. However, the meter varies between and even in lines. She also uses near rhymes, for example dawn/on, which imo is fine in adult poetry but not in kids books. Another book which annoyed me was Mr. Getaway and the Christmas Elves. The poetry in that book was truly painful.

Personally I wouldn't use the word bad for most of these books. I would say that much of it is simply ignorant and lazy. All many authors need (including the author of Goodnight Campsite) is some instruction and guidance. Those who really struggle, such as the author of Mr Getaway and the Christmas Elves, should switch to prose.
For some reason people seem to expect poetry in picture books. I can't understand this as some of the best picture books I've read are in prose, for example Looking for Crabs

Goodnight, Campsite's blurb says "Rhyming text will keep children engaged, as they build sound associations and phonemic skills."

It doesn't claim to be poetry.

That being said, even rhyming text should be readable. I was able to preview a bit of the text for Mr. Getaway and I agree with you that it was awfully clumsy.

Some people expect to see rhyme and rhythm in picture-books. I don't believe they expect to see poetry.

Rhyme and rhythm are good, if done carefully, because they help the adult read aloud gracefully, and they help children with pre-reading and reading skills.

If you want an example of poetry done right, explore books like Dark Emperor and Other Poems of the Night. If you want an example of rhythmic text done right, check out stories like Armadilly Chili.

I would rather have poetry without metre and rhyme than poetry where the rhyme scheme feels awkward and the rhythm substandard.

I have found some truly outstanding poetry picture books, but also some that at least for me, do not work at all, but that being said, poetry (and whether one enjoys) a book of poetry is also something rather personal, unless the poetry is so bad and awkward that one can only grind ones teeth.

And apropos editors, one reason (in my opinion) that editing has become lesser and less accurate, less stringent is the fact that many editors likely rely much or even mostly on their word processing spell and grammar check tools and that will only go so far (and will not catch awkward style, homonym mistakes and the like).

Once Upon a Northern Night, is lovely and poetic but the poetry is definitely free form and without rhyme, but totally atmospheric and evocative.

You make an interesting point, Cheryl. I had always divided texts into either poetry or prose. If an author used rhythm, rhyme and other poetic devices then I classed it as poetry. It had not occurred to me that picture book authors may write a rhythmic text and not consider it poetry.
I will take that on board when I read picture books in future, however I'm still not going to be able to enjoy books that muddle meter. It's too grating on my senses.
Thanks for your suggestions.

I agree Manybooks, I would much rather have free form poetry than poorly written rhythmic/rhyming poetry. I know there are good books out there. My problem at the moment is finding them and accessing them. Your suggestion sounds like a lovely book.

Janelle wrote: "I agree Manybooks, I would much rather have free form poetry than poorly written rhythmic/rhyming poetry. I know there are good books out there. My problem at the moment is finding them and accessi..."

I really loved the book, but you might not like it if you truly hate winter.

Lol. Yes I'm not a fan of winter and tend not to read books that feature it.

Janelle wrote: "Lol. Yes I'm not a fan of winter and tend not to read books that feature it."

Something to consider ...

Hi everyone, I know I'm not on here often but was curious to read these posts.
I was GOING INSANE thinking it was just me questioning the quality of picture books out there these days.
My kids in the reading groups make their opinions really vocal if they don't like a book and I have found that the most popular of picture books written by one or two authors whom I enjoy reading too also have separate illustrators - I won't mention their names but you'll know who I like and don't like on my profile (it will be fully updated by the end of the month).
Anyway - my point is that I have had to go right back to the classics of picture books that were created before the self-publishing boom of the last few years. The most popular of books though are the old-fashioned illustrated Ladybird Children's books - my reading group kids just love those!

Hi Gabby, isn't it nice to know we're 'not the only one'. My kids are adults now, but I have fond memories of reading some terrific picture books to them when they were young. I'm sure good books are still being published, but perhaps the market is being swamped, and so the good ones are harder to find.

Janelle wrote: "Hi Gabby, isn't it nice to know we're 'not the only one'. My kids are adults now, but I have fond memories of reading some terrific picture books to them when they were young. I'm sure good books a..."

Totally agree Janelle!

Joining a group like this one, and following reviews of trusted friends, and using resources like Horn Book magazine and ALA, will help winnow through the chaff a lot.

Randomly going into a bookstore, department store, or onto Amazon is a *bad* strategy! :)

Libraries... well, it depends. I do look at the displays, but generally I'm not overly impressed with the choices our librarians make. I go in with a list that I've developed from friends' recs and other features here on Goodreads.

And yes, please name names! That's what Goodreads is for!! Don't worry about hurting feelings or breaking protocol or anything - tell us what's good and what's bad!

Another strategy is to check the Picture Book Club, both the club reads but also the master lists.

I'm not buying this idea that you can have text *with* rhyme and meter and it's not poetry. There is no *other* required quality that defines something as poetry. Now, it may very well be bad poetry, but that's another matter. But I think we need to judge its quality on the basis that it *is* poetry. Of course, there is poetry *without* rhyme and meter (free verse), but the presence of rhyme and meter remove a text from the world of prose. And just because a text doesn't explicitly claim to be poetry doesn't mean it isn't.

Cheryl wrote: "Joining a group like this one, and following reviews of trusted friends, and using resources like Horn Book magazine and ALA, will help winnow through the chaff a lot.

Randomly going into a book..."
Thanks Cheryl :-)

Manybooks wrote: "Another strategy is to check the Picture Book Club, both the club reads but also the master lists."

I didn't even know about this - Thank YOU!!

Cheryl, this is one of my problems at the moment, using the exact strategy you suggest not to. Unfortunately I don't have much choice. Like you, I'm not impressed with everything my library stocks in picture books, and I notice that the better quality books are usually out on loan, so readers seem to be discerning.
But that's moot for me anyhow, as health issues prevent me from getting to my library. Health issues also mean I'm on a disability pension and can't afford to buy books. So I'm hunting out freebies on the net, and while not every book is a dud, lots are. But I think I'll start paying closer attention to the picture book club.

Michael I agree with your comments about poetry. But Cheryl's point gave me insight into how authors, publishers and readers may perceive the text in a picture book. If there is a belief out there that rhyme and rhythm don't automatically indicate poetry, then it explains to me why so many picture books with poetry (as I perceive it) are written so poorly. Why would an author go to the trouble of adhering to the spirit of poetry, if they don't believe they are writing poetry? And readers of course wouldn't care if the poetry was dodgy, if they didn't know it was poetry in the first place.

The most popular of books though are the old-fashioned illustrated Ladybird Children's books - my reading group kids just love those!

These really are wonderful -- my kids like them, too -- but they are very difficult to find in the USA. I have the impression that Ladybird at the time spent a lot of money on art, but not very much on producing books that stood up to handling by the younger set, so the tiny volume of volumes that made it here from the UK is further lessened.

I have had to go right back to the classics of picture books that were created before the self-publishing boom of the last few years

I've had quite a bit of success by paging through mid-century recommendation lists. A decent subset was republished recently enough to still be available through the library, some of the older recommendations have fallen out of copyright, and worst case, there's a fair number of used ones available online for $5, shipping included.

User Emily recently put together a Goodreads list of Children's Books Recommended by Helen Dore Boylston and Jane Cobb in their Atlantic Monthly Columns 1946-1951, which was rather fun to look through. A fair number of picture books are included.

Some definitions of poetry:

Dictionaries:

A literary work in which special intensity is given to the expression of feelings and ideas by the use of distinctive style and rhythm; poems collectively or as a genre of literature.

Writing that formulates a concentrated imaginative awareness of experience in language chosen and arranged to create a specific emotional response through meaning, sound, and rhythm.

Dylan Thomas:

“Poetry is what in a poem makes you laugh, cry, prickle, be silent, makes your toe nails twinkle, makes you want to do this or that or nothing, makes you know that you are alone in the unknown world, that your bliss and suffering is forever shared and forever all your own.”

More poets' ideas here: http://flavorwire.com/413949/20-poets....

Janelle wrote: "Michael I agree with your comments about poetry. But Cheryl's point gave me insight into how authors, publishers and readers may perceive the text in a picture book. If there is a belief out there ..."

I only assume that a children's book is meant to be poetry if it's portrayed in the traditional way. You know, centered, italicized, title at the top of the separate poems. A book that rhymes isn't necessarily poetry to me. Prelutsky's "New Kid on the Block" is obviously poetry. Taback's version of "There was an Old Lady who Swallowed a Fly" does rhyme fairly often, but, I'm not sure I would call it poetry.

I think it's reasonable for people to have different definitions of poetry. As a poet, I have my own definition, and that includes rhyming rhythmic text, even in picture books that don't explicitly state that they're poetry.
But I appreciate everyone's comments, as they have answered part of my original question, which was am I out of sync with other readers. Apparently the answer is, yes I am out of sync with at least some readers. And that's ok.

I think it is important to differentiate between writing that is poetic and writing that can be regarded as poetry. Writing can be poetic without being poetry, but conversely, substandard poetry can also feel and read as substantially unpoetic.

While I do NOT assume that poetry has to rhyme to be seen as such, I do tend to expect poetry to be either rhyming or free verse, and not a combination thereof (which I personally do not like all that much).

And really, just because a few sentences rhyme does not mean a given work is poetry, as for me, the rhyming would need to be persistent throughout and the style of the text presented and depicted as verses and not as prose (and that holds true even with and for free verse, non rhyming poetry).

Interesting discussion. I have never considered rhyming to be an essential of poetry (though I am no expert). I looked at it more as art. What is being communicated and how. Just as song lyrics rhyme but I would not call the majority of it poetry. Though there are those songs that do rise to that level for me. I have a few rhyming short stories (thankfully unpublished at this point in time). that I feel are entertaining but that no means rise to the level of poetry.
There are paintings and there is art. Poetry is art, Rhyming is painting in my opinion.

By the way, I do agree with your original post. Obviously there's a lot of junk published.

I just thought it important to define the problem... I'm of a logical & scientific bent and prefer discussions in which we've determined that we are all actually using the same terms the same way....

Anyway, I'm off to start a thread to help each other find free books, especially online ones....

Cheryl wrote: "By the way, I do agree with your original post. Obviously there's a lot of junk published.

I just thought it important to define the problem... I'm of a logical & scientific bent and prefer discus..."

That sounds like a great idea!!

Case in point: I just read From the Bellybutton of the Moon/Del ombligo de la luna: And Other Summer Poems/Y otros poemas de verano, which I saw on a list of essential diversity titles. With two or three exceptions, the poetry was weak. It mostly seemed like the author took a sentence and broke it into lines to look like a poem. Not all poetry has to rhyme, but unrhymed poetry should have more purpose than that. There are other books (The Surrender Tree: Poems of Cuba's Struggle for Freedom) that do a lot more with the form.

A related pet peeve for me is digital illustrations. I thought the illustrations in this book (and in others I've read recently) lack the texture that gives emotional weight to picture books.

Phil wrote: "Case in point: I just read From the Bellybutton of the Moon/Del ombligo de la luna: And Other Summer Poems/Y otros poemas de verano, which I saw on a list of essential diversity title..."

I agree that The Surrender Tree: Poems of Cuba's Struggle for Freedom is outstanding, and if the poems had been presented as a parallel text (and not the English and then the Spanish version), I would have rated the book with five stars (but it was driving me crazy having to constantly flip back and forth, as I was attempting to read the poems concurrently, because my Spanish is a bit too rusty to not do that).

Absolutely agree case in point the Monsters Wear Underpants etc by Claire Freedman. Absolutely adored these books to start with. 2nd one was great, byt the 3rd, 4th, 5th it's like... the idea has been hacked to death and the rhyme in some areas was a complete fail. So dissapointing and I wonder if the publishers out pressure on her to keep churning them out?
Such a shame as the first few were so wonderful.

Phil wrote: "Case in point: I just read From the Bellybutton of the Moon/Del ombligo de la luna: And Other Summer Poems/Y otros poemas de verano, which I saw on a list of essential diversity title..."

mmmn agree but disagree on your pet peeve becuase yes some churn out very basic and awful cartoon like digital illustrations. But I've seen some photoshop pieces that are pure art created by digital masters and this touches me for it's modernity and use of tech. Adore it.

Hi,

I just lurk for the most part but I felt I had to comment on the rhyming aspect of books at least.

Around 10 years ago I was getting knocked back by publishers with rhyming text. This is not because it was bad, I even had comments such as 'beautiful piece of work,' but because the market wasn't trending for rhyming at that time.
In the end I was writing stories for individual kids locally - simply if I felt like it.
Then one day a mum stuffed a book under my nose that the school had given her son to read. He was about 7 and it was recommended reading and an 'award winning' rhyming text. It was, quite possibly, the most difficult thing to read and even I had trouble negotiating it. I'm certain it was, perhaps, 'innovative' and 'contemporary,' but both parents and kids also thought it was 'garbage.'
She was so angry that I couldn't get a publisher with stories that her kids (and others) loved.
In the end, and thanks to Kindle et al, I just decided to put some in books.
Better there than on my hard drive.

Now though, I often edit for people. And it is truly amazing how many believe they can write in rhymes but they can't. These are people who are self publishing, not through publishers.
Yes, well, they believe they can write rhyme in the same context that I believe I have a good singing voice...

But publishers do seem to be taking this standard on board and I don't get it either!

You make a good point, Mike. I guess there must be a trend today for rhyming texts in picture books. Whereas when my kids were young (20 years ago) most of the books being published were written in prose.

Certainly they were always popular when we were kids.

I'd make the point though, that trends affect kid's books in general more than any other kind. It flips from one thing to another so quickly that luck plays a huge part in whether a writer gets published. Unbelievably so.

I know that one of the first things I submitted would have been back in 2006 and I was told, 'if this had been 2 years ago I'd have snatched your hand off. But the trend has changed.'

When the trend is in however, then they seem to accept work that, shall we say, lacks polish.

I suppose at the end of the day publishing is a business, and publishers feel compelled to follow trends in order to make profits.

Mike wrote: "Hi,

I just lurk for the most part but I felt I had to comment on the rhyming aspect of books at least.

Around 10 years ago I was getting knocked back by publishers with rhyming text. This is not ..."

I would be interested to know the title of the award winning book you reference in this comment. Thanks!

Hi Janelle

Yes, it most certainly is a business and you can't blame them. That book has to be 'sold' to many people before it is ever put before the public. Most books, I believe, don't make a profit. It's the select few that bring in the money.
That's why celebrities will nearly always get published - because, good or bad, their books do sell.

But, for me, at least with kid's books and picture and rhyming text in particular, I have to sometimes wonder if publishers, rather than the market, drive the trends? Then things move too quickly if anything.

Beverley - I am really sorry, I can't remember. If I went on a hunt I probably could find it. I think the year was 2010 and I think the subject was dinosaurs. Could be wrong about both, but I'm certainly close.

I didn't have a copy, I just had it thrust into my hands, was asked to read a few lines and then it was snatched from me again.
The mum was furious. Her boy was having trouble reading at the time and she said, and probably rightly, that the book was simply making him lose more confidence. He didn't accept that it was also difficult for his mum, his sister and me, to read.

Oh, and I've just remembered; rhyming text is difficult to translate effectively so overseas markets are usually a no-go. Again, this cuts down on potential profits.

So, everything considered, why poorly finished rhyming text is getting into kid's books, is a bit of a mystery. For every reason under the sun, it really shouldn't.

Mike, perhaps there is a perception in the market and with publishers that picture books are "supposed" to be written to be written with rhyme/rhythm. And if, as Cheryl suggested, these books aren't being generally being regarded as poetry, then the standards of good poetry aren't being applied to them.

I also think that many people don't take children's books seriously, even publishers. Is it possible that publishers are willing to churn out kid's books, based on a market model, with less regard to quality, because they believe that other areas of publishing are more worthwhile and profitable? If publishers believe it's "just a kid's book" and not a profitable sector of the market it would make sense that they wouldn't have incentive to be stringent on standards.

Hi Janelle,

I don't really know about the first part. Most publishers and agents who accept unsolicited picture books will actually state in their guidelines that they don't accept rhyming text. Some will actually say that it's because most isn't very good.

When it comes to your second point, I'd hate to think that was true. I'm not saying it isn't in some cases, just that I'd wouldn't like to hear it.

There are many publishers who specialise in picture books, so I can't see how or why, it should be true. But there is, most certainly, an attitude among the public and even some other writers, that believes because there are so few words then they can be thrown together in minutes.
If publishers think that way then there's no hope!

Of course, the opposite is true. The amount of time spent on those 'few words' is days, weeks or more likely months. The main problem that I see today, with people who try to create rhyming text stories at least, is that they expect to finish quite a lengthy piece in less than a week.
I just don't think it should even be considered that way. Rhyming text needs setting aside constantly and then reworking. And for young children more so. And for books which are going to be read by many different accents, more so still.

But, you're right, it's not a profitable section of the market.

I'm surprised that most publishers state that they don't accept unsolicited rhyming texts. That doesn't make sense given the number of rhymed books available. But I'll have to take your word on it, as I'm sure you know better than I.
As for my second point, I'm a cynic and a fatalist, so perhaps I'm not the best person to give an opinion.
And I'm in total agreement with you about the extra effort that needs to go into children's books. I think that's why I reacted so strongly to the poor quality picture books I've been reading. I used to write children's poetry, though I can't anymore because of poor health. I know how I slaved to perfect my rhymes and other myriad tiny details in my poems. Seeing others just slap something together makes me feel quite sad.

Publishers do accept rhyming text, just not unsolicited stuff. The work that gets published has, most likely, gone through an agent. But then a lot of agents don't accept unsolicited material...it's a vicious circle.

I'll freely admit I haven't read anything new in rhyming text for a while, but it's sad to see so many people commenting that they've noticed the poor standard.

Manybooks wrote: "Once Upon a Northern Night, is lovely and poetic but the poetry is definitely free form and without rhyme, but totally atmospheric and evocative."
Thanks so much! I think there's a lot of poetry published for children that is absolutely beautiful (check out "This is a Poem that Heals a Fish") and, as a writer, it is important to me to lay a foundation for love of language at a young age. I have also written in rhyming verse (No Dragons for Tea) which was intentionally used as a literary device to engage reader participation. It is extremely difficult, but very rewarding when done well. And yes, the editor plays an essential role. After working with the words for months, it is sometimes difficult to hear (and it should be heard, not read) the lapses in rhythm that lead to a clumsy outcome. Love this thread. :-)